Response of epiphytic lichens to 21st Century climate change and tree disease scenarios

Ellis, Christopher J.; Eaton, Sally; Theodoropoulos, Marios; Coppins, B. J.; Seaward, M. R. D.; Simkin, Janet

doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2014.09.046

Cited by 40 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 64 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…More specifically, in the case of predominantly vertical transmission of photobionts (i.e. Furthermore, while there are studies addressing climate change impacts on lichens (Klanderud and Totland 2005, Crabtree and Ellis 2010, Bjerke 2011, Ellis et al 2014, Lendemer and Allen 2014, Allen and Lendemer 2016, none of them considers environmental preferences of symbiont partners separately. In contrast, if algal switches are frequent, the spatial genetic structure of partners should be incongruent, resembling a broad generalistic distribution for mycobionts associating with distinct, locally restricted, photobionts (Werth and Sork 2010, Fernández-Mendoza et al 2011, Dal Grande et al 2012, O'Brien et al 2013.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Thus, modeling niche dimensions (and spatial distributions) for photobionts and mycobionts respectively will provide a more detailed picture of potential coevolutionary 'hotspots', where reciprocal selection between partners is strong, and 'coldspots', where reciprocal selection is weak or absent throughout the lichen's range (Thompson 1999, Brodie et al 2002. Furthermore, while there are studies addressing climate change impacts on lichens (Klanderud and Totland 2005, Crabtree and Ellis 2010, Bjerke 2011, Ellis et al 2014, Lendemer and Allen 2014, Allen and Lendemer 2016, none of them considers environmental preferences of symbiont partners separately. However, assuming that photobiont switches are an adaptive strategy, at least in some lichens (Piercey-Normore and DePriest 2001, Werth and Sork 2008, and that some photobionts may even occur free-living (Mukhtar et al 1994, Beck et al 1998, an important question then arises as to what extent particular photobionts are climatically suitable in order to facilitate future range shifts in lichens (Ellis 2012).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Quantifying the climatic niche of symbiont partners in a lichen symbiosis indicates mutualist‐mediated niche expansions

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The large distributional areas and ecological niches of many lichenized fungi may in part be due to the plasticity in interactions between the fungus (mycobiont) and its algal or cyanobacterial partners (photobionts). On the one hand, broad-scale phylogenetic analyses show that partner compatibility in lichens is rather constrained and shaped by reciprocal selection pressures and codiversification independent of ecological drivers. On the other hand, sub-species-level associations among lichen symbionts appear to be environmentally structured rather than phylogenetically constrained. In particular, switching between photobiont ecotypes with distinct environmental preferences has been hypothesized as an adaptive strategy for lichen-forming fungi to broaden their ecological niche. The extent and direction of photobiont-mediated range expansions in lichens, however, have not been examined comprehensively at a broad geographic scale. Here we investigate the population genetic structure of Lasallia pustulata symbionts at sub-species-level resolution across the mycobiont's Europe-wide range, using fungal MCM7 and algal ITS rDNA sequence markers. We show that variance in occurrence probabilities in the geographic distribution of genetic diversity in mycobiontphotobiont interactions is closely related to changes in climatic niches. Quantification of niche extent and overlap based on species distribution modeling and construction of Hutchinsonian climatic hypervolumes revealed that combinations of fungal-algal interactions change at the sub-species level along latitudinal temperature gradients and in Mediterranean climate zones. Our study provides evidence for symbiontmediated niche expansion in lichens. We discuss our results in the light of symbiont polymorphism and partner switching as potential mechanisms of environmental adaptation and niche evolution in mutualisms.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Quantifying the climatic niche of symbiont partners in a lichen symbiosis indicates mutualist‐mediated niche expansions

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Most studies have used a threshold of model probability or likelihood of occurrence in designating a cut-off for climatically suitable sites, thus calculating a shifted distribution or extent of these locations between the baseline and climate change scenarios [86][87][88][89][90][91][92]. A smaller number of studies have used a net difference of probability/likelihood values to calculate a shift in climatic suitability for a given region [93][94][95]. The results of these studies serve to highlight the potential significance of climate change in lichen conservation.…”

Section: Challenge 2: Projection To Climate Change Scenariosmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Analysis for lichen biogeographic groups can indicate the contrast between species with losses and gains of bioclimatic space [96], with a loss of suitable climate space for c. 75% of species modelled for the Iberian Peninsula by the 2080s [90]. Projection of suitable climate space for 382 lichen epiphytes in Britain [94,95] indicated 38% of species losing and 62% gaining suitable climate space, again by the 2080s, and emphasising the potential scale of compositional turnover in lichen diversity. Table 2.…”

Section: Challenge 2: Projection To Climate Change Scenariosmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These studies projecting to climate change scenarios have tended to use accumulated distributions from presence-only data as a response, with pseudo-absences (though see [92,93]), and probably in an effort to isolate the strength of any climate change effect, have tended to focus exclusively on climate predictors. Studies that included nonclimatic covariables [86,91,92,94,95] may be more comprehensive ecologically, but have the added complexity of isolating a species sensitivity across multiple different predictors, in order to estimate the unique effect of climate change.…”

Section: Challenge 2: Projection To Climate Change Scenariosmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Climate Change, Bioclimatic Models and the Risk to Lichen Diversity

Ellis

2019

Diversity

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper provides an overview of bioclimatic models applied to lichen species, supporting their potential use in this context as indicators of climate change risk. First, it provides a brief summary of climate change risk, pointing to the relevance of lichens as a topic area. Second, it reviews the past use of lichen bioclimatic models, applied for a range of purposes with respect to baseline climate, and the application of data sources, statistical methods, model extents and resolution and choice of predictor variables. Third, it explores additional challenges to the use of lichen bioclimatic models, including: 1. The assumption of climatically controlled lichen distributions, 2. The projection to climate change scenarios, and 3. The issue of nonanalogue climates and model transferability. Fourth, the paper provides a reminder that bioclimatic models estimate change in the extent or range of a species suitable climate space, and that an outcome will be determined by vulnerability responses, including potential for migration, adaptation, and acclimation, within the context of landscape habitat quality. The degree of exposure to climate change, estimated using bioclimatic models, can help to inform an understanding of whether vulnerability responses are sufficient for species resilience. Fifth, the paper draws conclusions based on its overview, highlighting the relevance of bioclimatic models to conservation, support received from observational data, and pointing the way towards mechanistic approaches that align with field-scale climate change experiments.

show abstract

Lichens

Hawksworth

2021

Encyclopedia of Life Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Lichens are most appropriately viewed as self‐supporting ecosystems formed by the interaction of a fungus, one or more photosynthetic partners, and an indeterminate number of other microscopic organisms – with the fungal partner providing the overall physical structure and scientific name used to refer to them. They were the first associations to which the term symbiosis was applied and are mutualisms as all partners benefit by enabling new habitats to be colonised. Their different morphologies, structures and ecophysiological relationships are introduced, and their dispersal and establishment discussed. Ecological roles range from other organisms that are dependent on them for food or camouflage, to involvement in rock weathering. Special attention is given to their use as biodindicators of air pollutants, habitat disturbance and climate change. Current economic and traditional uses are summarised, and attention is drawn to the numerous natural products produced some of which have potential pharmaceutical applications. Key Concepts Names given to lichens strictly refer only to the fungal component and the fungi involved are integrated into the overall system of fungal classification. The fungi involved are mainly ascomycetes, dispersed through around 40 different orders, and many include fungi other than those that form lichens. Single genera can include species that form lichens and ones with different biologies. Some single species are facultative lichen‐formers, sometimes producing a lichen and sometimes not, or starting as invaders of other lichens and then becoming independent. Lichen symbioses were well‐established by the Devonian, when land plants first evolved, but long before flowering plants arose in the Cretaceous. The photosynthetic partners in lichens, green algae or cyanobacteria, are less diverse and different ones can associate with a single fungal partner. Specialised bacteria, most unknown outside lichens, are now recognised as an integral part of lichen associations. Lichens are largely dependent on nutrients and moisture from the air and long‐lived, making them valuable as biodindicators of air pollutants and climate change. Lichens have important roles in global geochemical cycles, especially carbon. The fungal partners produce over 800 natural products, many of which have potential pharmaceutical applications.

show abstract

Response of epiphytic lichens to 21st Century climate change and tree disease scenarios

Cited by 40 publications

References 64 publications

Quantifying the climatic niche of symbiont partners in a lichen symbiosis indicates mutualist‐mediated niche expansions

Quantifying the climatic niche of symbiont partners in a lichen symbiosis indicates mutualist‐mediated niche expansions

Climate Change, Bioclimatic Models and the Risk to Lichen Diversity

Lichens

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About